Media Bias

[CRedskinsRule]

Watching CSpan coverage, the reporters asking questions of senators kept over talking the republican senators and house republicans, yet gave awe filled silence when Adam Schiff spoke. If you want to see a serious example of media bias sinply look at the feeding frenzy around republican senators, versus their awesome reverance of Mr Schiff.

Sent from my SM-G973U using Tapatalk

[Chico23231]

Originally Posted by CRedskinsRule

Watching CSpan coverage, the reporters asking questions of senators kept over talking the republican senators and house republicans, yet gave awe filled silence when Adam Schiff spoke. If you want to see a serious example of media bias sinply look at the feeding frenzy around republican senators, versus their awesome reverance of Mr Schiff.

Sent from my SM-G973U using Tapatalk

Ted fuckin Cruz crushed that piece of shit liberal hack journalist when he did...it was glorious

[punch it in]

Originally Posted by CRedskinsRule

Watching CSpan coverage, the reporters asking questions of senators kept over talking the republican senators and house republicans, yet gave awe filled silence when Adam Schiff spoke. If you want to see a serious example of media bias sinply look at the feeding frenzy around republican senators, versus their awesome reverance of Mr Schiff.

Sent from my SM-G973U using Tapatalk

Maybe it is because the horse shit coming out of their mouths is more interesting than the truth?

[CRedskinsRule]

Originally Posted by punch it in

Maybe it is because the horse shit coming out of their mouths is more interesting than the truth?

Whatever. Watch it, and then think about it in role reversal terms. It was blatant but obviously you can't be objective about it. Thats fine, it is where we are. C'est la guerre.

Sent from my SM-G973U using Tapatalk

[punch it in]

Originally Posted by CRedskinsRule

Whatever. Watch it, and then think about it in role reversal terms. It was blatant but obviously you can't be objective about it. Thats fine, it is where we are. C'est la guerre.

Sent from my SM-G973U using Tapatalk

Sorry but when ken starr and that dipshit from harvard are completely contradicting themselves in a mind numbing manner what is there to be objective about? Let’s not over complicate this shit. If you want to say you think asking for dirt on the bidens in exchange for military aid is ok than have at it. But that is EXACTLY what happened. And no Obama didn’t do it first.

[CRedskinsRule]

Originally Posted by punch it in

Sorry but when ken starr and that dipshit from harvard are completely contradicting themselves in a mind numbing manner what is there to be objective about? Let’s not over complicate this shit. If you want to say you think asking for dirt on the bidens in exchange for military aid is ok than have at it. But that is EXACTLY what happened. And no Obama didn’t do it first.

How about if someone doesn't think it is ok, but they also don't think it warrants removal?

[Chico23231]

Originally Posted by punch it in

Sorry but when ken starr and that dipshit from harvard are completely contradicting themselves in a mind numbing manner what is there to be objective about? Let’s not over complicate this shit. If you want to say you think asking for dirt on the bidens in exchange for military aid is ok than have at it. But that is EXACTLY what happened. And no Obama didn’t do it first.

Yes Biden threaten the Ukraine PM to remove an Ukraine Prosecutor and threaten him with 1 billion Loan Guarantees in aid. He specifically said, if its not done by the time I get back on his plane, then no aid.

Biden and I quote: What you know, son of a bitch, the prosecutor was fired.

Look up the video as Biden explains this on a campaign stop.

Yes, Biden and the Obama Administration participated in a quid pro quo.

[BigHairedAristocrat]

Originally Posted by Chico23231

Yes Biden threaten the Ukraine PM to remove an Ukraine Prosecutor and threaten him with 1 billion Loan Guarantees in aid. He specifically said, if its not done by the time I get back on his plane, then no aid.

Biden and I quote: What you know, son of a bitch, the prosecutor was fired.

Look up the video as Biden explains this on a campaign stop.

Yes, Biden and the Obama Administration participated in a quid pro quo.

Biden was acting on behalf of the official policy of the united states government at the time.

This is not about threatening to cut off a country's aid. There is nothing wrong with that. Its done all the time. I would hope that Trump regularly uses his power as POTUS to exert pressure on other world leaders to support America's interests.

The difference here is that, in this case, if the allegations are true, Trump would not have been acting on behalf of the United states official policy towards Ukraine. He would have been using his power for PERSONAL political gain.

This is the difference. Whether you agree with it or not, do you understand that part?

[Chico23231]

[QUOTE=BigHairedAristocrat;1243662]Biden was acting on behalf of the official policy of the united states government at the time.

This is not about threatening to cut off a country's aid. There is nothing wrong with that. Its done all the time. I would hope that Trump regularly uses his power as POTUS to exert pressure on other world leaders to support America's interests.

The difference here is that, in this case, if the allegations are true, Trump would not have been acting on behalf of the United states official policy towards Ukraine. He would have been using his power for PERSONAL political gain.

The president investing corruption is doing the same.

Bolded. You are jumping

Read the transcripts… and put down the "opinion" articles. The facts don't connect these things. Bribery, Treason, and Extortion are high crimes and misdemeanors, if these things were true and proven the Impeachment article would have included these along with the witness testimony/documentation within the House process. They didn't.

[punch it in]

Originally Posted by BigHairedAristocrat

Biden was acting on behalf of the official policy of the united states government at the time.



This is not about threatening to cut off a country's aid. There is nothing wrong with that. Its done all the time. I would hope that Trump regularly uses his power as POTUS to exert pressure on other world leaders to support America's interests.



The difference here is that, in this case, if the allegations are true, Trump would not have been acting on behalf of the United states official policy towards Ukraine. He would have been using his power for PERSONAL political gain.



This is the difference. Whether you agree with it or not, do you understand that part?

Facts psssh.....

[CRedskinsRule]

Originally Posted by BigHairedAristocrat

Biden was acting on behalf of the official policy of the united states government at the time.

This is not about threatening to cut off a country's aid. There is nothing wrong with that. Its done all the time. I would hope that Trump regularly uses his power as POTUS to exert pressure on other world leaders to support America's interests.

The difference here is that, in this case, if the allegations are true, Trump would not have been acting on behalf of the United states official policy towards Ukraine. He would have been using his power for PERSONAL political gain.

This is the difference. Whether you agree with it or not, do you understand that part?

BUT, that really falls under the concept of a black or white fallacy.

The black-or-white fallacy occurs in arguments that have a disjunctive premise―that is, one that gives alternatives―when one or more alternatives is incorrectly omitted. The fallacy tries to force you to choose either black or white when gray is an available alternative.

It is entirely possible (and honestly highly likely) that President Trump was using his power for both Official Policy (rooting out corruption in Ukraine - this is obviously a strong and ongoing interest for US policy) and personal political gain. That is what Pres Obama did in asking the Russian Foreign Minister to let Putin know he would have more leeway after his election. Bush did it by expressing "Mission Accomplished" on a US Naval vessel, he clearly wanted to energize his base, AND strengthen his US policy toward Iraq. It has been done in many ways and many times. And I would say that, in Biden's case, holding up the aid to remove the prosecutor also falls under both - upholding US policy, and in the interest of Biden's personal family's gain/protection.